How stiff and costlier is the Z07 suspension..?
#1
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
How stiff and costlier is the Z07 suspension..?
Hope errone is having a great holiday weekend
I have only experienced the FX3 alone. I read the Z07 = FX3 + Z07 upgrades:
--bigger brakes
--stiffer springs
--thicker sway bars
--faster steering ratio
--same size tire all around - 275/40/17 correct?
--G92 performance axle
Correct me on any of that ^^ please
So I read the ride is not super stiff or race-like w/ the Z07 pkg on later MYs bc they softened the springs year after year
Anyone have experience with the Z07 ride compared to FX3-only C4s?
What MPG drop could you expect from the G92 performance axle? Is this a bad choice for a DD?
How much more expensive would it be to replace and maintain brakes and other Z07 parts compared to non-Z07 parts?
And the performance axle, is that something to look out for maintenance wise? Might be a dumb question sorry lol Not looking to race or mod anything, Im helping a friend look for a C4 and I know little about this option!
I have only experienced the FX3 alone. I read the Z07 = FX3 + Z07 upgrades:
--bigger brakes
--stiffer springs
--thicker sway bars
--faster steering ratio
--same size tire all around - 275/40/17 correct?
--G92 performance axle
Correct me on any of that ^^ please
So I read the ride is not super stiff or race-like w/ the Z07 pkg on later MYs bc they softened the springs year after year
Anyone have experience with the Z07 ride compared to FX3-only C4s?
What MPG drop could you expect from the G92 performance axle? Is this a bad choice for a DD?
How much more expensive would it be to replace and maintain brakes and other Z07 parts compared to non-Z07 parts?
And the performance axle, is that something to look out for maintenance wise? Might be a dumb question sorry lol Not looking to race or mod anything, Im helping a friend look for a C4 and I know little about this option!
Last edited by jay23ls; 05-30-2016 at 10:54 PM.
#2
Race Director
Hope errone is having a great holiday weekend
I have only experienced the FX3 alone. I read the Z07 = FX3 + Z07 upgrades:
--bigger brakes
--stiffer springs
--thicker sway bars
--faster steering ratio
--same size tire all around - 275/40/17 correct?
--G92 performance axle
Correct me on any of that ^^ please
So I read the ride is not super stiff or race-like w/ the Z07 pkg on later MYs bc they softened the springs year after year Anyone have experience with the Z07 ride compared to FX3-only C4s?
How much more expensive would it be to replace and maintain brakes and other Z07 parts compared to non-Z07 parts?
And the performance axle, is that something to look out for maintenance wise? Might be a dumb question sorry lol Not looking to race or mod anything, just learning about this C4 option since Im helping a friend look for a C4 and this one option I know little about
I have only experienced the FX3 alone. I read the Z07 = FX3 + Z07 upgrades:
--bigger brakes
--stiffer springs
--thicker sway bars
--faster steering ratio
--same size tire all around - 275/40/17 correct?
--G92 performance axle
Correct me on any of that ^^ please
So I read the ride is not super stiff or race-like w/ the Z07 pkg on later MYs bc they softened the springs year after year Anyone have experience with the Z07 ride compared to FX3-only C4s?
How much more expensive would it be to replace and maintain brakes and other Z07 parts compared to non-Z07 parts?
And the performance axle, is that something to look out for maintenance wise? Might be a dumb question sorry lol Not looking to race or mod anything, just learning about this C4 option since Im helping a friend look for a C4 and this one option I know little about
for example: i retrofitted my caged 93 supercharged vert with all the z07 parts except:
faster ratio steering
thicker rear sway bar (though note i did put on the thick front one)
i have bilstein z51 shocks (not sure if these are similar in dampenig rate vs z07, but i assume they are)
i have all rubber bushings replaced with, not poly, but banski rod ends (in the rear) and delrin in the front.
again, ride really is pretty good. in fact replacing stiff worn out bushings with banski rod ends actually made ride better since it transfers road forces thru springs/shocks vs stiff bushings that didnt absorb anymore
i also run more aggressive 315/35r17's on the rear (in hopes of better straightline traction) vs a square setup.
other than upfront parts costs, no idea how they would be more expensive to maintain
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (05-30-2016)
#3
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
not much stiffer. you will notice it, but not enough to be annoyed with ride, for example.
for example: i retrofitted my caged 93 supercharged vert with all the z07 parts except:
faster ratio steering
thicker rear sway bar (though note i did put on the thick front one)
i have bilstein z51 shocks (not sure if these are similar in dampenig rate vs z07, but i assume they are)
i have all rubber bushings replaced with, not poly, but banski rod ends (in the rear) and delrin in the front.
again, ride really is pretty good. in fact replacing stiff worn out bushings with banski rod ends actually made ride better since it transfers road forces thru springs/shocks vs stiff bushings that didnt absorb anymore
i also run more aggressive 315/35r17's on the rear (in hopes of better straightline traction) vs a square setup.
other than upfront parts costs, no idea how they would be more expensive to maintain
for example: i retrofitted my caged 93 supercharged vert with all the z07 parts except:
faster ratio steering
thicker rear sway bar (though note i did put on the thick front one)
i have bilstein z51 shocks (not sure if these are similar in dampenig rate vs z07, but i assume they are)
i have all rubber bushings replaced with, not poly, but banski rod ends (in the rear) and delrin in the front.
again, ride really is pretty good. in fact replacing stiff worn out bushings with banski rod ends actually made ride better since it transfers road forces thru springs/shocks vs stiff bushings that didnt absorb anymore
i also run more aggressive 315/35r17's on the rear (in hopes of better straightline traction) vs a square setup.
other than upfront parts costs, no idea how they would be more expensive to maintain
Not sure if you know about this since you probably only raced your vert but what MPG drop could you expect from the G92 performance axle? You think its a bad choice for a DD?
Last edited by jay23ls; 05-30-2016 at 10:56 PM.
#4
Melting Slicks
do you realise the fx3 option comes with the soft springs and swaybars ?
have you seen this thread,
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...84-96-z51.html
have you seen this thread,
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...84-96-z51.html
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (05-31-2016)
#5
Team Owner
The RPO code for the G92 Performance axle only shows that the car has an optional performance axle. The gear ratios were different based on whether it was a coupe, convertible or if the car had a manual or auto trans.
Check the Service Parts Identification label for G44 (3.07) or GM3 (3.45). Z07 was a coupe-only option and could be had with either the 6-speed or automatic. So the installed ratio will depend on the trans. Maintenance is not an issue. The same gear oil is used for both.
Gas mileage shouldn't be too bad with the performance axle; cruising on a freeway in top gear and using the cruise control could bring as much as 30 MPG if not just over that. Around town, 14-17 depending on traffic and shifting patterns. Any "drop" in mileage based on gearing should not be significant.
Check the Service Parts Identification label for G44 (3.07) or GM3 (3.45). Z07 was a coupe-only option and could be had with either the 6-speed or automatic. So the installed ratio will depend on the trans. Maintenance is not an issue. The same gear oil is used for both.
Gas mileage shouldn't be too bad with the performance axle; cruising on a freeway in top gear and using the cruise control could bring as much as 30 MPG if not just over that. Around town, 14-17 depending on traffic and shifting patterns. Any "drop" in mileage based on gearing should not be significant.
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (05-31-2016)
#6
Le Mans Master
Z07 will ride firmer due to higher spring rates 91 had the stiffest front spring, J55 13" front rotors cost more the base 12". The bigger bars will reduce body roll in corners. If you MPG's are important find a M6. The FX3 because there is more to it will cost more to maintain than non-adjustable shocks. The 275/40/17s cost less and are easier to find than the staggered 255/285 matching combo
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (05-31-2016)
#7
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
Z07 will ride firmer due to higher spring rates 91 had the stiffest front spring, J55 13" front rotors cost more the base 12". The bigger bars will reduce body roll in corners. If you MPG's are important find a M6. The FX3 because there is more to it will cost more to maintain than non-adjustable shocks. The 275/40/17s cost less and are easier to find than the staggered 255/285 matching combo
Thanks for all the other info! Just saw that the all around 275s are a bit less than the staggered combo. Will prob save even more w/ tire rotation non-Z07s can't do.
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (05-31-2016)
#9
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
do you realise the fx3 option comes with the soft springs and swaybars ?
have you seen this thread,
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...84-96-z51.html
have you seen this thread,
https://www.corvetteforum.com/forums...84-96-z51.html
But according to your thread the rear spring rate is what affects ride comfort the most so the 90.0 front spring rate won't cause teeth chatter? lol serious question.
Last edited by jay23ls; 05-31-2016 at 09:34 PM.
#10
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
#11
Melting Slicks
I hadn't, thanks for posting it. Well I looked at that and a chart called the Hib Henderson chart and see the 94 FX3 front spring rate was 60.0 The 94 Z07 spring was 90.1 I just started learning about this stuff but that's a 50% increase from 60.0!
But according to your thread the rear spring rate is what affects ride comfort the most so the 90.0 front spring rate won't cause teeth chatter? lol serious question.
But according to your thread the rear spring rate is what affects ride comfort the most so the 90.0 front spring rate won't cause teeth chatter? lol serious question.
It seems as if the 326 lb spring was really the sweet spot in the rear !
The rear sway bars varied from 22mm to 26mm.
84 - 87 rear end had a higher roll centre than the later 88 -96 and struggled with the 499 lb spring.
so from a performance perspective, 326 lbs in the rear works in the c4 without being harsh, and you can tune handling with sway bar size.
shockers are really important to ride too, I have single adjustable gas set on 2 out of 5 on the rear, and they work really well, giving a smooth ride.
The following users liked this post:
jay23ls (06-06-2016)
#12
Burning Brakes
Thread Starter
after 1984 they changed the rear z51 spring rate from 499 lbs to 326 lbs and left that rate all the way till the end of the c4.
It seems as if the 326 lb spring was really the sweet spot in the rear !
The rear sway bars varied from 22mm to 26mm.
84 - 87 rear end had a higher roll centre than the later 88 -96 and struggled with the 499 lb spring.
so from a performance perspective, 326 lbs in the rear works in the c4 without being harsh, and you can tune handling with sway bar size.
shockers are really important to ride too, I have single adjustable gas set on 2 out of 5 on the rear, and they work really well, giving a smooth ride.
It seems as if the 326 lb spring was really the sweet spot in the rear !
The rear sway bars varied from 22mm to 26mm.
84 - 87 rear end had a higher roll centre than the later 88 -96 and struggled with the 499 lb spring.
so from a performance perspective, 326 lbs in the rear works in the c4 without being harsh, and you can tune handling with sway bar size.
shockers are really important to ride too, I have single adjustable gas set on 2 out of 5 on the rear, and they work really well, giving a smooth ride.
And the mpg drop don't look significant from that different gearing. Very useful